fostering prospective teachers' abilitiesnof learning

0 downloads 0 Views 492KB Size Report
... life-long, so to be always in condition to adjust ourselves to the changing needs of our work environments (Halliday 2003, ..... Who Wants to Learn Forever?
IADIS International Conference Cognition and Exploratory Learning in Digital Age (CELDA 2004)

FOSTERING PROSPECTIVE TEACHERS' ABILITIESNOF LEARNING TO LEARN WITHIN AN ICT PREPARATION COURSE Giuliana Dettori * Paola Forcheri ** * ITD-CNR, Genova, Italy ** IMATI-CNR, Genova, Italy

ABSTRACT In order to cope successfully with life-long learning it is necessary to be able to learn autonomously, effectively and efficiently, and to be aware of one’s motivations and needs. This entails becoming self-regulated learners. Based on a wide analysis of the literature, we worked out a methodological framework to devise practical activities implementing the control abilities generally accepted as the basis of self-regulation (control of cognition, behaviour, motivation and volition) and at the same time the key processes of the socio-cognitive approach (self-observation, self-evaluation, selfreaction), together with favourable context conditions. We experimented our methodological framework in a teacher preparation course aiming to foster abilities of self-regulated learning along with knowledge acquisition on ICT. This paper presents: our methodological framework, examples of the activities we worked out to implement it, considerations on the role of ICT to help structure a favourable environments, and comments on the obtained results. KEYWORDS

Life-long learning, Self-regulated learning, Teacher preparation, Methodology, Practical examples, ICT.

1. INTRODUCTION In the past few years, many papers in the literature have underlined how the current rapidity of technological changes have made it necessary for all to become able to modify and widen our competencies life-long, so to be always in condition to adjust ourselves to the changing needs of our work environments (Halliday 2003, Zhang & Nunamaker 2003). This entails for everyone to become able to learn autonomously in much greater measure than ever. The increased importance of life-long learning has therefore given impulse to many studies and projects regarding the design and testing of learning models apt to foster the development of skills of autonomous learning (Forcheri et al. 2000, Hiebert et al 2003). Learning autonomously is not sufficient, however, to cope successfully with life-long learning. It is also necessary to be able to learn effectively and efficiently, as well as to organize one’s activity and improve one’s attitude, so to perceive life-long learning as an opportunity rather than as a burden. Perceiving positively life-long learning entails becoming aware of one’s own motivations and emotions related to learning. Learning efficiently means becoming able to control one’s own behaviour during learning activities, so to cope with the requirements of different situations. Learning effectively means avoiding the problem of inert knowledge (Whitehead 1929), that is, avoiding to acquire theoretical or practical knowledge without being able to use it in problem solving or to adapt it to different contexts. Some authors argue that the ability to apply knowledge relies on the ability to imagine the situations where it will be possibly applied (Vye et al 1998). This entails being able to reflect on newly acquired knowledge and to understand its role in the general framework of one’s situation. Summing up all these conditions, coping with life-long learning entails learning to learn, that is, becoming able to turn a study activity into knowledge acquisition, and to organise the acquired knowledge so that it does not remain inert, but can be correctly applied in a variety of different situations. In other words, this means acquiring the complex and articulated range of abilities which characterize Self-Regulated Learning (SRL) (Bolhuis 2003).

91

ISBN: 972-98947-7-9 © 2004 IADIS

The development of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) has determined in good measure the current need for life-long learning, but at the same time offers several tools which can be helpful to cope with these new preparation needs: on one side, the Internet allows access to a variety of knowledge resources, which are available anywhere at any time; on the other side, using ICT tools for teaching and learning offers the opportunity to modify the structure of educational processes so to foster the development of abilities of SRL (Beller & Or 98, Corrigan & Taylor 2004, Land & Hannafin 2000). It is then necessary to design courses that integrate self-regulated learning abilities among their aims, together with knowledge mastering. This is not simple nor straightforward, since there is not a tradition on which we can relay: currently, in most educational systems learning to learn abilities are not fostered beyond the most basic level, that is, reading and understanding a text, tackling a mathematical problem, performing a bibliographical search, performing simple planning and generalization tasks. In the past years, we have focused our attention on working out an approach to foster abilities of selfregulated learning within a curricular course which implements an innovative methodology based on the use of ICT tools. We have experimented our ideas within an ICT course for teacher preparation, by means of a spiral approach, that is, progressively improving it each year based on the outcomes of the previous one. In this paper, we describe the main lines of this experience, explain how we proceeded to put in practice the theoretical principles of self-regulated learning, comment the results obtained, and underline the role of ICT in structuring a favourable environment.

2. SKILLS NECESSARY TO SELF-REGULATE LEARNING Self-regulated learning is being considered with increasing attention in the literature (Boekaerts et al. 2000; Torrano Montalvo & Gonzales Torres 2004). Among the many authors working on this topic, there is general agreement that self-regulated learning depends on a compound set of factors, including not only cognition (what school systems are currently focused on), but also behaviour, motivation, emotions (Zimmerman 2001), and volition (Corno 2001). There is also agreement on the fact that learners do not self-regulate in the same way on all tasks, since SRL abilities are context-dependent and need to be adapted when passing to different learning contexts (Bolhuis 2003). Some authors also suggest that, in order to help students to become more self-regulated, it is necessary: • to create and structure favourable learning environments offering opportunities to control the essential dimensions of learning (Rosario et al 2004), as well as opportunities for feedback (Kramarsky & Zeichner 2001), reflection and revision (Vye et al 1998); • to organize activities which favour the use of cognitive and meta-cognitive strategies; • to provide opportunities for self-monitoring; • to provide continuous evaluation and chances for self-evaluation. Within the consistent framework which arises from the literature, however, different authors have analyzed this topic from slightly different points of view or at various levels of detail, proposing different taxonomies that highlight either sets of skills to develop, or strategies to implement, or phases to carry out in the learning process, or areas to take into consideration (Zimmerman 2001). This causes some difficulties to teachers and trainers who wish to design their courses so to promote self-regulated learning along with knowledge acquisition. Hence, we have tried to integrate different points of view present in the literature and to devise a set of practical activities corresponding to the key processes of the theoretical framework of SRL. In particular, we analysed what does it mean to interpret the control of one’s cognition, behaviour, motivation, and volition within the key processes highlighted by the social-cognitive approach to SRL (Bandura 1986), that is, selfobservation, self-evaluations and self-reaction. We completed this picture by considering the possible influence of a suitable context. Then we analyzed what kinds of practical abilities could correspond to the mentioned key processes and at the same time give rise to the basic control abilities of SRL. The result of this investigation is presented in Tab. 1. In this view, the main role of teachers consists in proposing meaningful activities and conducting them so to give rise to the above mentioned conditions apt to structure favourable learning environments. We performed this analysis based on two sources:

92

IADIS International Conference Cognition and Exploratory Learning in Digital Age (CELDA 2004)

• •

The suggestions offered in the literature to structure favourable learning environments, organize activities fostering meta-cognition, offer possibilities of self-monitoring and self-assessment, give reasoned feedback frequently (see references above). Our experience in teacher preparation on basic ICT, centred on encouraging trainees to acquire specific knowledge, and, at the same time, experience its use as a means to support learner-controlled learning (Dettori et al. 2002; Dettori et al. 2004).

3. AN ICT COURSE ORIENTED TO SELF-REGULATED LEARNING We experimented our methodological approach in the course “Multimedia in Education” of the Teacher Training School (SSIS; see http://www.concured.it/docsingsc.htm) of the University of Genoa (Italy), which is active from the school year 1999-2000. This is a 3-credit course, for prospective teachers of secondary school (henceforth called “the students”) in all disciplines. Around 120-150 students take part in it every year, subdivided into six disciplinary areas (humanities, foreign languages, scientific disciplines, art and drawing, philosophy, support). The course aims to give the students basic ICT elements, so to prepare them: 1) to consciously use multimedia and web tools in their school practice; 2) to be operatively aware of ICT’s evolution and impact on society, in particular on the school world. The course program includes basic notions of computer’s organization and functioning; the concept of application program, with examples of basic office applications; introduction to the Internet as a tool to access, exchange and share information; creation and possible educational uses of multimedia. Moreover, SRL abilities are included among the aims of the course. The program was modified over the years, increasing the topics’ articulation and allowing the students to partially personalize the program, based on their background (i.e. learning needs) and on their personal interests. The methodological choices underlying our course are modelled according to the general framework presented in Tab.1. A specification of them with respect to the course content, together with examples of the assigned tasks, is presented in Tab.2. Let us briefly comment on the aspects of our methodological choices that, in our opinion, emerged as key points to support the development of SRL abilities. Module’s selection. The course was subdivided into two-hour modules. In order to take into account the different needs and motivations of all students, the course included both core modules on the basic topics and alternative modules deepening the core topics in different directions, which could be selected as alternatives. For instance, as concerns the web, students with some knowledge on web programming could chose “JavaScript”, while those more interested in information detection could prefer “Net-based and on-line searching”. Moreover, it was possible to chose to deepen either the theoretical or the practical aspects of each module. This methodological choice was aimed at adjusting the different initial levels of knowledge of our students without penalizing anybody, so to allow our students to gain some preparation on all main topics, though at different expertise levels. This articulation of the program was made possible by the particular nature of the topic addressed (ICT) where a restricted base of knowledge is really essential to learn for all prospective teachers, and this core knowledge can be deepened or expanded in different directions. Selection of the difficulty level. For each module, we assigned tasks of different kinds, at increasing levels of difficulty, i.e. both technical exercises and reflections were proposed at beginner, intermediate or advanced level. The overall set of tasks for each module was organized as a ‘learning path’ through the topic, where students could decide what segment it was more proper for them to work on. Temporal organization of the modules. We chose to organize the module’s development so to allow all students to reach interesting results in a short time, in order to keep up their motivation and self-confidence. Final evaluation. In order to contextualize learning and encourage the students to focus on personal objectives and professionally relevant issues, the final evaluation entailed, besides the solution of a number of technical and reflection exercises on the course content, also the preparation of an educational project making use of ICT. Projects had to be completed by a description of their design, relevance of possible applications, motivations for the choice and difficulties encountered. We encouraged the development of group projects, but the project’s description and the exercises had to be worked out individually. Project’s topic and exercises were selected by each student, but all choices had to be motivated and negotiated with the teachers. In order to avoid disorientation, we gave some different examples of final projects, and templates of possible developments; however, we strongly encouraged the students to make use of their previous

93

ISBN: 972-98947-7-9 © 2004 IADIS

knowledge and experience to autonomously propose and structure new ideas, by means of reflections on the course’s topics. In order to stimulate methodological reflection, we asked them to include in the project’s description an analysis of the difficulties faced. Tasks’ assessment. In order to turn the assessment into a learning activity and introduce elements of selfmonitoring and self-evaluation, a three-step evaluation of the project (and of its description) was introduced: 1) negotiation of the topic with the teachers; 2) presentation of a draft of the project and related description, on which the teachers would guide a reflection by means of questions apt to highlight how much they were conscious of the choices made, and to point out possible improvements; 3) re-elaboration of the project and final presentation. In the second phase, we encouraged comparison and cross-evaluations among students with comparable background and interests. In order to design an assessment suited to the methodology adopted, we evaluated also the students’ behaviour in the lab, the participation in the methodological discussions and the effort spent in revising the project, putting in relation achievements and background. Extra hours in the lab. The possibility of exploiting extra-hours in the lab was offered to improve motivation and seriousness of application Since these extra hours entailed extra hours of work also for the teachers, this choice aimed to make the students better perceive the importance to concentrate on learning more than on passing the exam. High teachers/students rate in the lab. The teachers/students rate in the lab was 1 teacher every 12 students. This onerous choice aimed to offer high-quality coaching and scaffolding, and the possibility for the teachers to monitor attitudes and effective learning, thus helping the students acquire awareness of their own knowledge and possible need for help. Moreover, it aimed to increase the interactions between teachers and students, to verify that students’ choices were based on actual learning needs, and to improve student’s selfconfidence and reciprocal trust. Trust is a key condition to carry out successfully an approach of this kind, in that students need to feel that their difficulties and mistakes do not influence their final evaluation, and that no choice of activities is undervalued, since all the proposed ones can be occasions of learning. Activity’s articulation. In order to fit in with the different backgrounds of our students, the work included different activities: theoretical classes held by different lecturers, to allow the comparison of different teaching approaches; group work, to encourage collaboration; inter-group activities, to stimulate students to learn from peer’s work; development of individual tasks and projects. We encouraged the formation of groups of students with different competencies, so to increase the occasions to learn from each other. Moreover, we encouraged interactions between groups, by suggesting, e.g. as concerns project’s organization, to ask groups which were already done with it to explain their negotiation process and choices. Autonomous schedule for the final project. This choice aimed to lead students to concentrate better on their learning needs and personal motivation, avoiding to overload the exam period, therefore lowering students’ anxiety. Net-based communication. Detailed information on the course and all working materials were available on the web and frequently updated. This aimed to clarify learning objectives and increase student’s trust. Moreover, part of the activities could be carried out through the net, in particular the discussion and revision of the final project and the other exercises required to pass the course, hence improving and varying the communication inside the course.

4. CONSIDERATIONS ON THE OUTCOMES OF THE EXPERIENCE Partial analyses of this experience were made in the past years from the point of view of students’ collaboration (Dettori et al. 2002), exploitation of the Internet resources (Dettori and Forcheri 2003), and the learning model applied (Dettori et al. 2004). Here we briefly analyze this experience from the point of view of SRL, focusing on the revised setting adopted in the last year (improved feedback, wider possibilities to personalize the course’s program, more careful choice of exercises stimulating reflection). Evaluation of SRL can be made by means of self-reporting questionnaires, structured interviews, teacher judgement, error detection in tasks, observation of task execution (Torrano Montalvo & Gonzales Torres 2004). We based the evaluation of our experience on: 1) the observation of students’ behaviour in the lab and of the interactions during the evaluation process; 2) the analysis of projects and exercises worked out by the students; 3) the outcomes of a final questionnaire aiming to check the level of understanding achieved, the appreciation of the course and possible changes of attitude. The results of this analysis were encouraging.

94

IADIS International Conference Cognition and Exploratory Learning in Digital Age (CELDA 2004)

The questionnaire shows that most students found the freedom of selection initially disorienting but in the long run productive, as concerns content learning and development of critical abilities, observation methods and content analysis in relation with one’s needs. Almost all students found the course more demanding, as concerns time and cognitive effort, than the other courses granting the same credits. The observation of the students in the lab confirms the initial disorientation reported by the questionnaire. Initially, they tended to wait for teacher’s directive, without taking initiative or organizing their time. There was no exchange of information nor comparisons of work between groups. This attitude gradually changed, mostly due to teacher’s encouragement and growth of reciprocal trust. The students increasingly took a reflective and constructive attitude, and learned to ask questions to verify their interpretations of difficulties and failures. Often, they spontaneously made a short discussion with other groups before consulting the teacher. Their behaviour during the elaboration of the final project confirmed this change of attitude. The negotiation of the project’s topic resulted to be the most difficult phase, especially as concerns understanding that they should focus on critical use of ICT rather than on technical aspects. The second phase of assessment highlighted a good disposition of the students to work with the teacher in revising the project’s material, figure out possible problems to overcome in order to produce a better version, spot unclear points which had lead to unsatisfactory choices, set goal to guide the further work. This gave rise to good-quality final projects. The above mentioned outcomes allowed us to spot which course’s features had been most crucial for the success of this experience as concerns SRL: • Merging the evaluation into the learning process. This lead in several cases to turn performanceoriented motivation into learning-oriented motivation. • Deepening progressively the learning topics, so to be in condition to carry out discussions on partially familiar ground, gradually adding metacognitive reflection to the cognitive one. This allowed us to introduce in natural way a research-oriented attitude. • Planning the temporal organization of the course so to lead the students in a short time to solve problems meaningful for them. This reinforced self-confidence, motivation, willingness to learn. • Encouraging the students to confront materials they were producing with those of their peers, so to stimulate operative reflection and self-evaluation of the experience. It is necessary, though, to propose reasonable comparisons, in order not to discourage the students. • Involving the students in the course’s choices as much as possible, by requesting and discussing operative observations on the methodological and organizational aspects; showing to take into account the outcome of such discussions, so to increase motivation and sense of responsibility. • Keeping in mind student’s background, interests and expectations, so to limit cognitive overload and avoid demotivation. The awareness that each one could adjust the course program according to his/her own background and needs helped decrease the anxiety of less prepared students, hence increasing their mental availability on their own abilities and potentialities. • Offering some content flexibility, so to make students understand more clearly their professional needs and interests. • Proposing articulated tasks to work out, which could be tackled at different levels of difficulty. ICT proved a good help to support the development of self-regulated learning, for several reasons: o ICT interconnection of theoretical and practical aspects, and its nature of applicative science, allow teachers to find complex and meaningful problems, which supports student’s motivation to learn it. o ICT has a central place in the current socio-cultural context, hence it is felt as a need by the students. o ICT allows the teacher to introduce complex issues (e.g. multimedia) by means of simple tools (e.g. office programs), hence avoiding the overload of adding the tools’ cognitive complexity to that of the topic under study. o ICT allows students to tackle challenging tasks in shorter time than many other topics. o Applying ICT in the fields of professional interest for the students, it is easy to find grounds more familiar to them than to the teacher; this compels the students to take responsibility in person of part of the reflections and discussions carried out. o ICT favours the realization of project-based teaching and collaborative working, based on complex, non-artful issues which require the integration of different competencies. o Due to the ease of getting big amounts of information, of much different values, from the Internet, ICT motivates the need to develop critical abilities and other basic skills such as categorizing, organizing and integrating information.

95

ISBN: 972-98947-7-9 © 2004 IADIS

o

Since in our case ICT was both the object of study and the tool to carry out activities, it offered the possibility to develop metacognitive reflections on applicative grounds, introducing some concreteness and hence making easier an otherwise difficult acivity.

REFERENCES Bandura, A (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Prentica Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ Bembenutty H., Karabenick S. T. (2004). Inherent association between academic delay of gratification, future time perspective and self-regulated learning. Educational psychology review, 16 (1), 35-57. Beller M., Or E. (1998). The Crossroads between Lifelong Learning and Information Technology. A Challenge Facing Leading Universities. JCMC vol. 4 issue 2 December 1998 Boekaerts M., Pintrich P. R., Zeidner M. (2000). Handbook of self-regulation. Academic Press., San Diego, CA Bolhuis, S. (2003). Towards process-oriented teaching for self-directed lifelong learning: a multidimensional perspective, Learning and Instruction vol.13, n. 3,, pp. 327-347 Corno L. (2001). Volitional aspects of self-regulated learning. In B.J. Zimmerman & D.A. Schunk (eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: theoretical perspectives (pp. 191-225). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, N.J. Corrigan G., Taylor N. (2004). An Exploratory Study of the Effect a Self-Regulated Learning Environment Has on PreService Primary Teachers' Perceptions of Teaching Science and Technology, International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education 2(1), pp. 45-62. Dettori G., Forcheri P. (2003). Combining different learning approaches: an experience in post-graduate teacher education. Proc. of 3rd International Conference on Technology in Teaching/Learning in Higher Education, Costas Spirou (ed.), pp. 53-58. Dettori G., Forcheri P., Molfino (2004). Using ICT to implement learning as a problem solving activity, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, special issue on PEG 2003 (to appear). Dettori G., Forcheri P., Molfino M.T, Moretti S., Quarati A. (2002). Shaping teacher preparation content according to emerging pedagogical paradigms. Proceedings of ICCE 2002, pp. 1044-1050. Forcheri P., Molfino M.T, Quarati A. (2000). ICT Driven Individual Learning: New Opportunities and Perspectives, Educational Technology & Society 3(1), pp. 51-61. Halliday J. (2003). Who Wants to Learn Forever? Hyperbole and Difficulty with Lifelong Learning. Studies in Philosophy and Education 22 (3), pp. 195-210. Hiebert J., Morris A., Glass B. (2003). Learning to Learn to Teach: An ``Experiment'' Model for Teaching and Teacher Preparation in Mathematics, Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 6 (3), pp. 201-222 Karamarsky B., Zeichner O. (2001). Using Technology to enhance mathematical reasoning: effects of feedback and self regulation learning. Educational Media International, 38 (2-3), pp.77-82. Land S.M., Hannafin M. J. (2000). Student-centered learning environments. In Jonassen D.H. & Land S. M., Theoretical foundations of learning environments (pp. 1-23). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, N.J. Rosario P., Nuñez Perez J.C., González-Pienda J.A. (2004). Stories that show how to study and how to learn: an experience in the Portuguese school system. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, vol.2, n.1, 131-144, http://www.investigacion-psicopedagogica.org/revista/index.php3. Torrano Montalvo F., Gonzales Torres M.C. (2004). Self-regulated Learning: Current and Future Directions. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, vol. 2, n.1, pp. 1-34, http://www.investigacionpsicopedagogica.org/revista/index.php3. Vye N. J., Schwartz D. L., Brasford J. D., Barron B. J., Zech L (1998). SMART Environments that support monitoring reflection and revision. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational Theory and Practice. Laurence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ. Whitehead A. N. (1029). The aims of education. Mac Millan, New York. Zhang D., Nunamaker J. F. (2003). Powering E-Learning In the New Millennium: An Overview of E-Learning and Enabling Technology. Information Systems Frontiers. 5 (2), 207-218 Zimmerman B. J. (2001). Theories of self-regulated learning and academic achievement: an overview and analysis. In B.J. Zimmerman & D.A. Schunk (eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: theoretical perspectives (pp. 1-37). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.

96

IADIS International Conference Cognition and Exploratory Learning in Digital Age (CELDA 2004)

Self-observation

Control of cognition (metacognition)

Self-evaluation

• Focusing • Self-monitoring personal objectives • Cross evaluation • Awareness of • Comparison of own knowledge experiences and lack of • Comparison with knowledge the outside world • Reflecting on • Comparison of personal learning own previous strategies knowledge with • Focusing new one personal resources

Self-reaction

Context conditions

• Adapting to a variety of different sources

• Possibility to share resources and problems

• Integrating different views

• Exploiting learning occasions

• Categorizing and • Sharing organizing problems with information peers • Obtaining feedback

• Awareness of stereotypes about learning

Control of behaviour

• Awareness of the • Discussing need for help difficulties and solutions • Focusing • Evaluating the possible learning time and effort to occasions reach a learning • Awareness of objective own preferred learning style

Control of motivation

• Personal orientation • Self-efficacy • Perception of the relevance of the task with respect to own needs and goals

• Awareness of stereotypes about Control of volition learning • Wish to learn • Initiative • Willingness to work with peers

• Learning from each other • Making use of social interactions

• Opportunity to ask peers and teachers for help • Opportunity to access some useful learning sources • Commitment to learning

• Evaluating possible learning sources

• Time

• Evaluating the opportunity to apply experience to new issues and knowledge

• Effective • External stimuli application of what • Need to learn is learned • Possibility of • Orienting applying own learning towards experience acquiring expertise • Help in setting goals

• Evaluating personal effort with respect to current needs

• Applying • Encouragement personal abilities to • Intellectual reach a common curiosity objective • Sense of • Overcoming responsibility stereotypes about • Taking and learning sharing • Willingness to responsibilities make use of others’ experience

Table 1. Abities involved in the key processes of self-regulating learning

97

ISBN: 972-98947-7-9 © 2004 IADIS

Choices Methodological choices Key Aspects Metacognition Choice of modules Self-observation Activities at various levels of difficulty Projects related to professional interest Self-evaluation Group-work Three-step final evaluation

Self-reaction Three-step final evaluation Inter-groups interaction

Kind of activities Reflection on the personal view and interest for a topic

Detect some aspects of multimedia you would wish to deepen, and explain why. Sketch the line of a paper on this topic, specifying what sources you want to refer to, your initial knowledge and the expected difficulties

Methodological reflection on group work Self-evaluation opportunities Analysis and comparison of sources of information

Reflect on your group activity, your contribution to it and what you received from it; explain what worked out well and what did not; can you figure out what should be changed in the organization or in the member's behaviour in order to improve the group's functioning? Find some bibliographical and web references about a topic of your interest and prepare a reasoned organization of it; then, analyse the analogous proposal of your colleagues of group X; derive hints to improve your work. Analyse the following electronic presentation, prepared by some of your peers. Which parts are you able to reproduce right away? And by thinking about it? For which parts do you think to need help from teacher or peers? Which parts do you judge yourself unable to develop?

Discussion on the Self-observation personal choices for the exercises Negotiation of the final project Self-evaluation Choice of the final project and of its presentation time

Analysis of material previously produced by other students

Self-reaction Whole class discussion activity

Discussions on the lessons Students’ evaluation of the modules

Behaviour

Motivation Self-observation

Focus on students’ personal interests and needs Individual/group work alternation Evaluation of the background

Self-evaluation Three-step final evaluation Choice among modules with different approaches Self-reaction Meaningful use of previous own experience and work habits Variety of alternative modules Self-observation Extra-lab hours Self-evaluation Variety of alternative modules Opportunity of negotiating activities Self-reaction Use of different communication means Include student works in course material

Volition

Examples

Students’ evaluation of their final project activity

Methodological reflection on the tools introduced Activities related with students’ professional practice Analysis of the tools introduced based on the task analysis

Revise your educational project: What were the main decisions you had to take? How did you negotiate them with your group? What difficulties did you find in organising the work and how did you cope with them? What were (if any) your main organisational mistakes? How would you change the organisation of the activity? Organise a discussion with peers on a course topic of your choice, highlighting the most important concepts examined and the methodological approach chosen Organise the work so to facilitate discussion and make it easy, at the end, to prepare a written summary. Re-design the school web-site: discuss within your group the negative and positive features of the present version, taking them into account in your design choices. Revise your project: does it clearly explain objectives, target audience, meaning of the proposal, added value of using ICT? Is its length reasonable with respect to the purpose and the context? Is technology used consistently with the expected educational result? Is the project clearly exposed? Choose one of the tools introduced. Discuss with a group of colleagues aspects of your own activity that could take advantage from it. Analyse the educational potential and drawbacks, giving examples of possible uses in the classroom, specifying the prospective kind of students

Applying and deepening previous knowledge on new tasks

Design a lesson on some self-chosen topic, using one or more of the tools introduced in the course. Specify target students, educational context, prerequisites, length, side activities and material to be used.

Reflection about personal difficulties and obstacles to learn

Write the diary of your activity, reporting learning progresses and events and situations which prevented it. Try to find out solutions to overcome such obstacles.

Evaluation of advantages, drawbacks and effort required by alternative solutions

Prepare a presentation of your educational activity to parents: analyse opportunities and drawbacks of a web presentation to include in your school site; evaluate time and effort required with respect to efficacy

Exam of own work at Compare your final project with a given one. Examine the light of the work of differences in educational and technical choices and style of others illustration, and compare them with yours.

Table 2. Classification of the educational choices of our course within the self-regulation framework

98